The post We STILL already won appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Homepage > News > Editorial > We STILL already won When I first wrote Bitcoin SV already won, I argued that the great battles over protocol and scaling had been decided. The original design, Satoshi’s design, had been vindicated by history. What remained was the war of education and adoption. On that front, I think BSV has been (purposely and maliciously) dragged into tangents and unnecessary bickering in the blockchain economy. Years later, the evidence is even clearer. We are still here, still building, and still winning on the technology while still suffering in communications, education, and adoption. The imitators have completely failed to catch up; they have drifted into ever more convoluted experiments, desperate to escape the simple truth: Bitcoin was right the first time. But they still think they have won for no other reason than market cap measured in dollars. But as a wise man once said: “If they win, they lose, because they cannot scale.” Looking back: The predictions came true In that first essay, I wrote that BSV had already demonstrated the victory of the UTXO model, the unbounded block size limit, and the principle of “simplify, don’t complicate.” Since then, those truths have only hardened. Protocol stability: BSV’s decision to restore and lock the base protocol means that developers build on a bedrock. Contrast this with Ethereum, where the rules of the game change constantly through forks and governance experiments. Scaling proof: Blocks in the thousands of megabytes have become ordinary. No other blockchain can sustain this without fragmenting into side-chains, rollups, or marketing buzzwords masquerading as technology. SPV vindicated: The concept of Simplified Payment Verification (SPV), described by Satoshi in 2008, remains unimplemented in BTC and essentially impossible in Ethereum. Yet SPV quietly undergirds real Bitcoin, enabling lightweight wallets and practical scaling. What was once a prediction is now… The post We STILL already won appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Homepage > News > Editorial > We STILL already won When I first wrote Bitcoin SV already won, I argued that the great battles over protocol and scaling had been decided. The original design, Satoshi’s design, had been vindicated by history. What remained was the war of education and adoption. On that front, I think BSV has been (purposely and maliciously) dragged into tangents and unnecessary bickering in the blockchain economy. Years later, the evidence is even clearer. We are still here, still building, and still winning on the technology while still suffering in communications, education, and adoption. The imitators have completely failed to catch up; they have drifted into ever more convoluted experiments, desperate to escape the simple truth: Bitcoin was right the first time. But they still think they have won for no other reason than market cap measured in dollars. But as a wise man once said: “If they win, they lose, because they cannot scale.” Looking back: The predictions came true In that first essay, I wrote that BSV had already demonstrated the victory of the UTXO model, the unbounded block size limit, and the principle of “simplify, don’t complicate.” Since then, those truths have only hardened. Protocol stability: BSV’s decision to restore and lock the base protocol means that developers build on a bedrock. Contrast this with Ethereum, where the rules of the game change constantly through forks and governance experiments. Scaling proof: Blocks in the thousands of megabytes have become ordinary. No other blockchain can sustain this without fragmenting into side-chains, rollups, or marketing buzzwords masquerading as technology. SPV vindicated: The concept of Simplified Payment Verification (SPV), described by Satoshi in 2008, remains unimplemented in BTC and essentially impossible in Ethereum. Yet SPV quietly undergirds real Bitcoin, enabling lightweight wallets and practical scaling. What was once a prediction is now…

We STILL already won

7 min read

When I first wrote Bitcoin SV already won, I argued that the great battles over protocol and scaling had been decided. The original design, Satoshi’s design, had been vindicated by history. What remained was the war of education and adoption. On that front, I think BSV has been (purposely and maliciously) dragged into tangents and unnecessary bickering in the blockchain economy.

Years later, the evidence is even clearer. We are still here, still building, and still winning on the technology while still suffering in communications, education, and adoption.

The imitators have completely failed to catch up; they have drifted into ever more convoluted experiments, desperate to escape the simple truth: Bitcoin was right the first time.

But they still think they have won for no other reason than market cap measured in dollars.

But as a wise man once said: “If they win, they lose, because they cannot scale.”

Looking back: The predictions came true

In that first essay, I wrote that BSV had already demonstrated the victory of the UTXO model, the unbounded block size limit, and the principle of “simplify, don’t complicate.” Since then, those truths have only hardened.

  • Protocol stability: BSV’s decision to restore and lock the base protocol means that developers build on a bedrock. Contrast this with Ethereum, where the rules of the game change constantly through forks and governance experiments.
  • Scaling proof: Blocks in the thousands of megabytes have become ordinary. No other blockchain can sustain this without fragmenting into side-chains, rollups, or marketing buzzwords masquerading as technology.
  • SPV vindicated: The concept of Simplified Payment Verification (SPV), described by Satoshi in 2008, remains unimplemented in BTC and essentially impossible in Ethereum. Yet SPV quietly undergirds real Bitcoin, enabling lightweight wallets and practical scaling.

What was once a prediction is now a retrospective. The experiments elsewhere were not paths forward. They were detours into cul-de-sacs designed to raise capital and excitement, and nothing more.

The cult of over-engineering

The problem with BTC, BCH, Ethereum, and their satellites is not simply that they disagree with BSV. It is that they have built castles on sand on purpose. Developer-governed systems are designed to be tinkered with. They see blockchains as novel experiments; play-things for them to mess with. They don’t see the value of a protocol set in stone because they think Satoshi was wrong to implement bitcoin with simplicity.

Take BTC’s Lightning Network: advocates promised that this patchwork of hashed time locks and liquidity channels would solve scaling. In practice, it became a kind of Rube Goldberg machine; a complex contraption designed to do a simple task badly. So badly, in fact, that the only reason that it works at all is because of deep compromises that have been made to centralize paths and channels for the sake of user experience while still calling their wholly separate network a new “layer on bitcoin.”

It’s as if Visa (NASDAQ: V) announced that bar tabs were its new “Layer 2” instead of just scaling on the path of least resistance.

Ethereum fares no better. Rollups, bridges, zero-knowledge proofs: each is clever, but together they form an impossible architecture. Every “solution” requires new trust assumptions, new attack surfaces, new risks. It is the software equivalent of a traveling salesman wandering further and further from home, only to realize the destination could have been reached by a direct road all along.

Meanwhile, the elegance of Bitcoin’s UTXO model requires none of this. One ledger, one protocol, infinite scale.

The core truth: Simplicity scales

The genius of Bitcoin lies not in exotic mathematics, but in the humility of simplicity. Each UTXO is an independent coin. Each block is a simple batch of transactions. Unlock the block size, transaction size, script limits, and a few other variables, and let miners compete to scale the network organically.

This is not just about payments. The same model applies to big data, identity, supply chain, and communications. Because the base protocol is simple and unbounded, complex applications can be built as overlays, schemas, indexes, and services that use the chain as their foundation.

Bitcoin becomes not just a currency but a universal database of timestamped truth.

By abandoning SPV, BTC forfeited this future. By refusing unbounded blocks, BCH capped its own ambitions. By rejecting simplicity, Ethereum locked itself into endless patchwork, and everyone else is following their lead.

Teranode: The decisive leap

If the first victory was conceptual, the next is numerical. Teranode, BSV’s enterprise-grade node software, is designed for throughput measured not in thousands of transactions per second (TPS), but in millions.

  • Solana brags about tens of thousands of TPS.
  • Visa and Mastercard (NASDAQ: MA) peak in the tens of thousands as well.
  • Teranode aims for four to five orders of magnitude more.

This is not a marginal gain, but a civilizational leap. For the first time in history, a single public ledger can handle not just global payments, but global data. From microtransactions to metanet-scale communications, the technical ceiling vanishes.

The point is not that BSV will compete with Visa or Solana. The point is that BSV renders their categories obsolete.

Why we STILL already won

The status quo is increasingly ominous. Competing blockchains spiral into complexity. Governments flirt with central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), promising efficiency but delivering little more but surveillance in place of sovereignty.

Social media giants and data monopolists continue to extract value from human behavior itself, treating individuals as mere nodes in their profit machinery.

But the real battle, the battle to scale bitcoin, was won years ago. You just haven’t heard about it because they have very successfully convinced you that it shouldn’t scale.

But the blueprint exists. The technology runs. The economic incentives are aligned. The rest is adoption, culture, and patience.

We STILL already won because:

  • The only scalable model is the one Satoshi designed.
  • The only implementation that has remained faithful to that design is BSV.
  • The only path forward is through simplicity and a “slowly then suddenly” business development strategy.

A call to builders

The challenge now is not to invent a new base layer, but to use the one that works.

That means building applications that treat data as money:

  • BitcoinSchema.org to standardize the simple primitives.
  • SigmaIdentity.com to link keys to identities securely.
  • 1SatOrdinals.com to manage assets as digital property.
  • Overlays to manage where your apps, tokens and other data lives commercially.

This is what true Web3 looks like: not speculation on cartoon animals packaged on shiny exchanges, but real systems where identities, assets, and interactions are bound by cryptographic truth, not by corporate whim or state capitalism.

Conclusion: The inevitable trajectory

When history is written, the great blockchain experiments of the 2010s and 2020s will be remembered not as rivals to Bitcoin, but as distractions from it. The malice of the small blockers, the predatory decisions of Silicon Valley, complexity of Lightning, the fragility of bridges, the novelty of ZK rollups; they all will fade like forgotten detours on the way back to the main road.

BSV remains the main road. Unbounded, simple, inevitable.

We STILL already won. The only question is how long it will take for the world to realize it. And when they do, they will discover that the tools were waiting all along.

Now is the time to build.

Watch: Developers can propel the BSV blockchain forward

title=”YouTube video player” frameborder=”0″ allow=”accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share” referrerpolicy=”strict-origin-when-cross-origin” allowfullscreen=””>

Source: https://coingeek.com/we-still-already-won/

Market Opportunity
Threshold Logo
Threshold Price(T)
$0.007809
$0.007809$0.007809
+1.29%
USD
Threshold (T) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

The post Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The cryptocurrency world is buzzing with a recent controversy surrounding a bold OpenVPP partnership claim. This week, OpenVPP (OVPP) announced what it presented as a significant collaboration with the U.S. government in the innovative field of energy tokenization. However, this claim quickly drew the sharp eye of on-chain analyst ZachXBT, who highlighted a swift and official rebuttal that has sent ripples through the digital asset community. What Sparked the OpenVPP Partnership Claim Controversy? The core of the issue revolves around OpenVPP’s assertion of a U.S. government partnership. This kind of collaboration would typically be a monumental endorsement for any private cryptocurrency project, especially given the current regulatory climate. Such a partnership could signify a new era of mainstream adoption and legitimacy for energy tokenization initiatives. OpenVPP initially claimed cooperation with the U.S. government. This alleged partnership was said to be in the domain of energy tokenization. The announcement generated considerable interest and discussion online. ZachXBT, known for his diligent on-chain investigations, was quick to flag the development. He brought attention to the fact that U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Commissioner Hester Peirce had directly addressed the OpenVPP partnership claim. Her response, delivered within hours, was unequivocal and starkly contradicted OpenVPP’s narrative. How Did Regulatory Authorities Respond to the OpenVPP Partnership Claim? Commissioner Hester Peirce’s statement was a crucial turning point in this unfolding story. She clearly stated that the SEC, as an agency, does not engage in partnerships with private cryptocurrency projects. This response effectively dismantled the credibility of OpenVPP’s initial announcement regarding their supposed government collaboration. Peirce’s swift clarification underscores a fundamental principle of regulatory bodies: maintaining impartiality and avoiding endorsements of private entities. Her statement serves as a vital reminder to the crypto community about the official stance of government agencies concerning private ventures. Moreover, ZachXBT’s analysis…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:13
United States Building Permits Change dipped from previous -2.8% to -3.7% in August

United States Building Permits Change dipped from previous -2.8% to -3.7% in August

The post United States Building Permits Change dipped from previous -2.8% to -3.7% in August appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Information on these pages contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Markets and instruments profiled on this page are for informational purposes only and should not in any way come across as a recommendation to buy or sell in these assets. You should do your own thorough research before making any investment decisions. FXStreet does not in any way guarantee that this information is free from mistakes, errors, or material misstatements. It also does not guarantee that this information is of a timely nature. Investing in Open Markets involves a great deal of risk, including the loss of all or a portion of your investment, as well as emotional distress. All risks, losses and costs associated with investing, including total loss of principal, are your responsibility. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of FXStreet nor its advertisers. The author will not be held responsible for information that is found at the end of links posted on this page. If not otherwise explicitly mentioned in the body of the article, at the time of writing, the author has no position in any stock mentioned in this article and no business relationship with any company mentioned. The author has not received compensation for writing this article, other than from FXStreet. FXStreet and the author do not provide personalized recommendations. The author makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability of this information. FXStreet and the author will not be liable for any errors, omissions or any losses, injuries or damages arising from this information and its display or use. Errors and omissions excepted. The author and FXStreet are not registered investment advisors and nothing in this article is intended…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:20
CME Group to launch Solana and XRP futures options in October

CME Group to launch Solana and XRP futures options in October

The post CME Group to launch Solana and XRP futures options in October appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. CME Group is preparing to launch options on SOL and XRP futures next month, giving traders new ways to manage exposure to the two assets.  The contracts are set to go live on October 13, pending regulatory approval, and will come in both standard and micro sizes with expiries offered daily, monthly and quarterly. The new listings mark a major step for CME, which first brought bitcoin futures to market in 2017 and added ether contracts in 2021. Solana and XRP futures have quickly gained traction since their debut earlier this year. CME says more than 540,000 Solana contracts (worth about $22.3 billion), and 370,000 XRP contracts (worth $16.2 billion), have already been traded. Both products hit record trading activity and open interest in August. Market makers including Cumberland and FalconX plan to support the new contracts, arguing that institutional investors want hedging tools beyond bitcoin and ether. CME’s move also highlights the growing demand for regulated ways to access a broader set of digital assets. The launch, which still needs the green light from regulators, follows the end of XRP’s years-long legal fight with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. A federal court ruling in 2023 found that institutional sales of XRP violated securities laws, but programmatic exchange sales did not. The case officially closed in August 2025 after Ripple agreed to pay a $125 million fine, removing one of the biggest uncertainties hanging over the token. This is a developing story. This article was generated with the assistance of AI and reviewed by editor Jeffrey Albus before publication. Get the news in your inbox. Explore Blockworks newsletters: Source: https://blockworks.co/news/cme-group-solana-xrp-futures
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/17 23:55